The following few pages provide a basic primer on negotiating and ratifying MEAs. Those familiar with MEA processes may wish to skip to the discussion of the Guidelines, following the primer. This primer includes a brief overview of the process for negotiating, ratifying, and operationalising MEAs and defines some of the key terms. The analysis is organised by a series of basic questions regarding the nature, procedures, and implications of MEAs.
What is an MEA?
The term “Multilateral Environmental Agreement” or MEA is a broad term that relates to any of a number of legally binding international instruments through which national Governments commit to achieving specific environmental goals. These agreements may take different forms, such as “convention,” “treaty,” “agreement,” “charter,” “final act,” “pact,” “accord,” “covenant,” “protocol,” or “constitution” (for an international organisation). The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties defines a “treaty” as “an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation.” As a practical matter, though, “treaty,” “convention,” and “agreement” are often used interchangeably. An amendment is a formal alteration of the treaty provisions affecting the parties to a particular agreement.
MEAs may be between two States, in which case they are usually termed “bilateral.” However, most MEAs are between three or more States, and thus “multilateral.” [For the purposes of this Manual, MEA includes bilateral agreements.]
As a principle of international law, MEAs (as with other international agreements) usually bind only those States who have agreed to be bound by the MEA. However, an MEA can affect non-Parties, for example by prohibiting or restricting trade by Parties with non-Parties.
MEAs may be stand-alone documents that include all the relevant requirements, or they can be “framework agreements” for which further agreements (protocols) are necessary to provide the necessary standards, procedures, and other requirements to implement the MEA effectively (see discussion of Guideline 11(d)
for more detail).
Other forms of MEAs may rely heavily on appendices (i.e., be “appendix-driven”). CITES and CMS are two examples of such MEAs. Appendix I of CITES includes species threatened with extinction, and international trade in these species is permitted only in exceptional circumstances. Appendix II of CITES includes species not necessarily threatened with extinction but in which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilisation incompatible with their survival. Appendix III of CITES includes species that are protected in at least one State which has asked other CITES Parties for assistance in controlling the trade. For CMS, Appendix I includes those migratory species that are endangered with extinction (due to trade, habitat loss, by-catch, etc.) throughout much or all of their range; and Appendix II lists migratory species whose conservation would benefit significantly from international cooperation through tailored agreements.
MEAs can follow a variety of models, including command and control, responsive regulation, and advisory.
Most commentators exclude “soft law” from the scope of MEAs. Soft law documents include action plans (such as Agenda 21), codes of conduct, declarations, resolutions, policies, and other non-binding documents. [Complication arises when certain soft law documents are deemed to reflect customary international law, and thus are binding; but such cases are beyond the scope of this analysis.]
For more information, see http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/intl/guides/treaty/ or http://www.uoregon.edu/~rmitchel/iea/overview/
definitions.htm